Benicia rejects Seeno project

BENICIA -- City Council members decided Tuesday not to "apply a Band-Aid to a gushing wound," as one resident said, instead rejecting plans for a major business park development.

The decision to halt a years-in-the-making northeast Benicia business park came closely on the heels of a rejection of the 528-acre "Seeno project's" environmental study.

The city's attorney said Benicia was more vulnerable to legal challenge by project developer Discovery Builders if it did not simply reject the entire business park. She added the caveat that beyond a legal challenge, rejecting the project outright was not necessarily the most practical decision.

Tuesday's decision followed a council agreement earlier this month to meet the developer about city expectations in a workshop-style setting. Because of scheduling conflicts, that workshop never took place.

The council's 4-1 roll call to reject the whole project was the second "no" vote against the development. The first came Oct. 7, when a proposal to approve the project failed. Mark Hughes was the lone council member voting Tuesday to spare the project.

"At some point, right or wrong, you do have to take a position," said Vice Mayor Tom Campbell, who previously has voted against the project.

The land in question is bracketed by East Second Street and Lake Herman Road. It has been in the works for some type of development by owner Seeno Homes since the early 1980s.

Discovery Builders may sue the city over the rejection, or reapply. Discovery Builders Vice President Salvatore Evola said Wednesday he did not know which direction the company, a Seeno subsidiary, would choose.

He has not met with company principals to gauge their plans, Evola said.

One resident said that the developer's concessions and willingness to sit down with city officials Tuesday was where discussions should have been years ago, rather than at the end.

Councilman Mike Ioakimedes echoed this sentiment, saying the city finally had the developer in the right place. While voting to kill the project, he said he was hesitant because the city will be dealing with the same applicant if it decides to pursue a new project at the site.

"Denying the (environmental impact report) addendum is just housekeeping, but it's frustrating to cut this off at the pass," Ioakimedes said. "We've been fighting for two years to get the developer to come to the table; they're at a place where we've wanted them to be."

The project's rejection was more clear-cut for the more than 50 audience members Tuesday, many of whom informally voted with raised hands to deny the project at the urging of former City Councilman Dan Smith.